, Volume 744, Issue 1, pp 223–233 | Cite as

The impact of introduced pike (Esox lucius L.) on allopatric brown trout (Salmo trutta L.) in a small stream

  • Trygve Hesthagen
  • Odd T. Sandlund
  • Anders G. Finstad
  • Bjørn O. Johnsen
Primary Research Paper


The abundance and size-structure of a formerly allopatric brown trout (Salmo trutta L.) population in an inlet stream to a small lake were monitored for 9 years (1987–1995) after the first observation of introduced pike (Esox lucius L.), and revisited 18 years later (2013). All age groups of brown trout were reduced after the pike introduction, especially older fish of age-≥2+, but less so for age-0+ and 1+ fish. We suggest that the decline of older brown trout is mainly due to the high predation pressure from pike when migrating into the adjacent lake to feed. Young stream-dwelling pike of age-0+ and 1+ which ranged between 6 and 27 cm in length may also exert a predation pressure on juvenile brown trout that remains in the stream.


Stream Brown trout Pike predation Density Population structure 



This study was financed by Norwegian Institute for Nature Research. We thank our colleague Ola Ugedal and two anonymous referees for valuable comments on this paper.


  1. Adams, C. E., 1991. Shift in pike, Esox lucius L., predation pressure following the introduction of ruffe, Gymnocephalus cernuus (L.) to Loch Lomond. Journal of Fish Biology 38: 663–667.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beyers, D. W., 1998. Causal inference in environmental impact studies. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 17: 367–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bohlin, T., 1977. Habitat selection and intercohort competition of juvenile sea-trout, Salmo trutta. Oikos 29: 112–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chapman, L. J. & W. C. Mackay, 1990. Ecological correlates of feeding flexibility in northern pike (Esox lucius). Journal of Freshwater Ecology 5: 313–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chapman, L. J., W. C. Mackay & C. W. Wilkinson, 1989. Flexibility in northern pike (Esox lucius): Fish versus invertebrate prey. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 46: 666–669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Davis, M. A., 2009. Invasion Biology. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK: 244.Google Scholar
  7. Diana, J. S., 1979. The feeding pattern and daily ration of a top carnivore, the northern pike (Esox lucius). Canadian Journal of Zoology 57: 2121–2127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Diana, J. S., W. C. Mackay & M. Ehrman, 1977. Movement and habitat preference of northern pike (Esox lucius) in Lac Ste. Anne, Alberta. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 106: 560–565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Eklöv, P. & S. F. Hamrin, 1989. Predatory efficiency and prey selection: Interactions between pike Esox lucius, perch Perca fluviatilis and rudd Scardinus erythrophthalmus. Oikos 56: 149–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Elliott, J. M., 1984. Numerical changes and population regulation in young migratory trout Salmo trutta in a Lake District stream. Journal of Animal Ecology 53: 327–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Elliott, J. M., 1985. Population regulation for different life stages of migratory trout Salmo trutta in a Lake District stream. Journal of Animal Ecology 54: 617–638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Elliott, J. M., 1994. Quantitative Ecology and the Brown Trout. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  13. Englund, G., F. Johansson, P. Olofsson, J. Salonsaari & J. Öhman, 2009. Predation leads to assembly rules in fragmented fish communities. Ecological Letters 12: 663–671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Frost, W. E., 1954. The food of pike (Esox lucius L.) in Windermere. Journal of Animal Ecology 23: 339–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Greenberg, L. A., 1992. The effect of discharge and predation on habitat use by wild and hactchery brown trout (Salmo trutta). Regulated Rivers: Research & Management 7: 205–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Greenberg, L. A., E. Bergman & G. Eklöv, 1997. Effects of predation and intraspecific interactions on habitat use and foraging by brown trout in artificial streams. Ecology of Freshwater Fish 6: 16–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hambright, K. D., R. W. Drenner, S. R. McComas & N. G. Hairston, 1991. Gape-limited piscivores: Planktivore size refuges, and the trophic cascade hypothesis. Archiv für Hydrobiologie 121: 389–404.Google Scholar
  18. Harvey, H. H., 1981. Fish communities of the Manitoulin Island lakes. Verhandlungen Internationale Vereinigung für Theoretische und Angewandte Limnologie Verhandlungen 20: 2031–2038.Google Scholar
  19. Hein, C. L., G. Öhlund & G. Englund, 2014. Fish introductions reveal the temperature dependence of species interactions. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 281: 20132641.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hesthagen, T. & O. T. Sandlund. 2012. Gjedde, sørv og suter: status, vektorer og tiltak mot uønsket spredning. Norwegian Institute for Nature Research, Report 669. 45. (in Norwegian).Google Scholar
  21. Hesthagen, T., P. Fiske, B. Barlaup & E. B. Thorstad. 2010. Fisk. In Nybø, S. (ed), Datagrunnlag for “Naturindeks for Norge”. DN-utredning 4-2010: 85–89 (in Norwegian).Google Scholar
  22. Jepsen, N., S. Pedersen & E. Thorstad, 2000. Behavioural interactions between prey (trout smolts) and predators (pike and pikeperch) in an impounded river. Regulated Rivers: Research & Management 16: 189–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jonsson, B., 1985. Life history patterns of freshwater resident and sea-run brown trout in Norway. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 114: 182–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jonsson, B. & N. Jonsson, 1993. Partial migration: Niche shift versus sexual maturation in fishes. Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries 3: 348–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jonsson, B. & N. Jonsson, 2011. Ecology of Atlantic salmon and brown trout. Habitat as a template for life histories. Fish & Fisheries series, Vol. 33. Springer, Dordrecht: 708.Google Scholar
  26. Kipling, C., 1984. A study of perch (Perca fluviatilis L.) and pike (Esox lucius L.) in Windermere from 1941 to 1982. Conceil International Pour L’Exploration de la Mer 41: 259–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Mann, R. H., 1985. A pike management strategy for a trout fishery. Journal of Fish Biology 27(Supplement A): 227–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mann, R. M., J. H. Blackburn & R. C. Beaumont, 1989. The ecology of brown trout in English chalk streams. Freshwater Biology 21: 57–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mayer-Pinto, M., B. L. Ignacia, M. T. M. Széchy, M. S. Viana, M. P. Curbelo-Fernandez, et al., 2012. How much is too little to detect impacts? A case study of a nuclear power plant. PloS ONE 7(10): e47871.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mills, D. H. 1964. The ecology of the young stages of the Atlantic salmon in the River Bran, Roo-shire. Freshwater and Salmon Fisheries Research 32: 58.Google Scholar
  31. Mills, C. A. & M. A. Hurley, 1991. Long-term studies on the Windermere populations of perch (Perca fluviatilis), pike (Esox lucius) and Arctic charr (Salvelinus alpinus). Freshwater Biology 23: 119–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Moyle, P. B., 1999. Effects of invading species on freshwater and estuarine ecosystems. In Sandlund, O. T., P. J. Schei & Å. Viken (eds), Invasive species and biodiversity management. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht: 177–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Museth, J., O. T. Sandlund, T. E. Brandrud, S. W. Johansen, G. Kjellberg, J. E. Løvik, O. Reitan, O. T. Taugbøl & K. J. Aanes. 2006. The river reservoir Løpsjøen in River Søndre Rena—A survey of vegetation, zooplankton, fish and birds 35 years after establishment. Norwegian Institute for Nature Research, Report 168: 53. (in Norwegian).Google Scholar
  34. Näslund, I., E. Degerman & F. Nordwall, 1998. Brown trout (Salmo trutta) habitat use and life history in Swedish streams: Possible effects of biotic interactions. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 55: 1034–1042.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Raat, A. J. P. 1988. Synopsis of biological data on the northern pike, Esox Lucius Linneaus, 1758. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. FAO Fisheries Synopsis No 30 Rev. 2: 178.Google Scholar
  36. Rahel, F. J., 1984. Factors structuring fish assemblages along a bog lake successional gradient. Ecology 65: 1276–1289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Ricker, W. E. 1975. Computation and interpretation of biological statistics of fish populations. Bulletine of Fisheries Research Board of Canada. Report No 191: 382.Google Scholar
  38. Robinson, C. L. K., 1989. Laboratory survival of four prey in the presence of northern pike. Canadian Journal of Zoology 67: 418–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Roy, E. D, J. F. Martin, E. G. Irwin, J. D. Conroy & D. A. Culver. 2010. Transient social–ecological stability: The effects of invasive species and ecosystem restoration on nutrient management compromise in Lake Erie. Ecology and Society 15 (1): 20 [online].
  40. Saksgård, R. & T. Hesthagen, 2004. A 14-year study of habitat use and diet of brown trout (Salmo trutta) and Arctic charr (Salvelinus alpinus) in Lake Atnsjøen, a subalpine Norwegian lake. Hydrobiologia 521: 187–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Saksgård, R. & T. Hesthagen. 2014. Fisk i Atnsjøen. In Jensen, T. C. (ed), Nettverk for biologisk mangfold i ferskvann—resultater 2012. Norwegian Institute for Nature Research, Minirapport 502: 18–22 (in Norwegian).Google Scholar
  42. Sandlund, O. T., T. Hesthagen & Å. Brabrand, 2013a. Coregonid introductions in Norway: Well-intended and successful, but destructive. Advances in Limnology 64: 341–358.Google Scholar
  43. Sandlund, O. T., K. Ø. Gjelland, T. Bøhn, R. Knudsen & P.-A. Amundsen, 2013b. Contrasting population and life history responses of a young morph-pair of European whitefish to the invasion of a specialised coregonid competitor, vendace. PLOS One 8(7): e68156.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Schartau, A. K., T. Hesthagen, B. M. Larsen & M. Lindholm. 2010. Ferskvann. In Nybø, S. (ed), Naturindeks for Norge. DN-utredning 3-2010: 60–69 (in Norwegian).Google Scholar
  45. Sepulveda, A. J., D. S. Rutz, S. S. Ivey, K. J. Dunker & J. A. Gross, 2013. Introduced northern pike predation on salmonids in southcentral Alaska. Ecology of Freshwater Fish 22: 268–279. doi: 10.1111/eff.12024.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Shafi, M. & M. S. Maitland, 1971. Comparative aspects of the biology of pike Esox lucius in two Scottish lochs. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh 71B: 41–60.Google Scholar
  47. Sharma, C. M. & R. Borgstrøm, 2008. Shift in density, habitat use, and diet of perch and roach: An effect of changed predation pressure after manipulation of pike. Fisheries Research 91: 98–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Smith, E. P. 2013. BACI design. In El-Shaarawi, A. H. & W. W. Piegorsch (eds), Encyclopedia of Environmetrics, Vol. 1. Wiley, New York: 141–148.Google Scholar
  49. Smith, E. P., D. R. Orvos & J. Jr Cairns, 1993. Impact assessment using the Before-After-Control-Impact (BACI) model: Concerns and comments. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 50: 627–637.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Spens, J. & J. P. Ball, 2008. Salmonid or nonsalmonid lakes: Predicting the fate of northern boreal fish communities with hierarchial filters relating to a keystone piscivore. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 65: 1945–1955.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Stewart-Oaten, A., J. R. Bence & C. W. Osenberg, 1992. Assessing effects of unreplicated perturbations: No simple solutions. Ecology 73: 1396–1404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Vehanen, T. & S. Hamari, 2004. Predation threat affects behaviour and habitat use by hatchery brown trout (Salmo trutta L.) juveniles. Hydrobiologia 525: 229–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Winfield, I. J., J. M. Fletcher & J. B. James, 2011. Invasive fish species in the largest lakes of Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales and England: The collective UK experience. Hydrobiologia 660: 93–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Trygve Hesthagen
    • 1
  • Odd T. Sandlund
    • 1
  • Anders G. Finstad
    • 1
  • Bjørn O. Johnsen
    • 1
  1. 1.Norwegian Institute for Nature ResearchTrondheimNorway

Personalised recommendations